💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • Govt. disagrees with India’s rank in World Press Freedom Index

    The Centre has shown its disagreement with the conclusions drawn by Reporters Without Borders about press freedom in India for various reasons.

    World Press Freedom Index

    • The PFI is an annual ranking of countries compiled and published by Reporters Without Borders since 2002.
    • It is based upon the organization’s own assessment of the countries’ press freedom records in the previous year.
    • It intends to reflect the degree of freedom that journalists, news organizations, and netizens have in each country, and the efforts made by authorities to respect this freedom.
    • It is careful to note that the index only deals with press freedom and does not measure the quality of journalism in the countries it assesses, nor does it look at human rights violations in general.

    India’s ranking

    • India is ranked at 142 out of 180 countries on the World Press Freedom Index 2021.
    • In the South Asian neighborhood, Nepal is at 106, Sri Lanka at 127, Myanmar (before the coup) at 140, Pakistan at 145 and Bangladesh at 152.
    • China is ranked 177, and is only above North Korea at 179 and Turkmenistan at 178.

    What the report said about India

    • Targeting women: It has been highlighted that the “campaigns are particularly violent when the targets are women”.
    • Criminal prosecutions: Often used to gag journalists critical of the authorities.
    • Draconian laws: It termed various Indian laws such as – laws on ‘sedition,’ ‘state secrets’ and ‘national security’, draconian.
    • Curb on freedom of expression: The report has also highlighted the throttling of freedom of expression on social media.
    • Censorship on social media: It specifically mentioned that in India the “arbitrary nature of Twitter’s algorithms also resulted in brutal censorship”

    Reservations held by India

    • India along with many nations has reportedly disgusted the outcomes of this report. It stated that media in India enjoy absolute freedom.
    • The government does not subscribe to its views and country rankings and does not agree to the conclusions drawn by this organization for various reasons:
    1. Non-transparent methodology
    2. Very low sample size
    3. Little or no weightage to fundamentals of democracy
    4. Adoption of a methodology that is questionable and non-transparent
    5. Lack of clear definition of press freedom, among others

    Why is the report biased?

    • The report is a subjective measure computed through the prism of western liberals.
    • It tends to default to a homogenous view of mass media which then facilitates comparison between countries.
    • There are no questions about media ownership or about their economic concentration in private hands.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Phrase ‘Anti-national’ not defined in statutes: MHA

    The phrase ‘anti-national’ has not been defined in statutes, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has informed the Parliament.

    Defining Anti-national Activities

    (1) Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act  

    • The UAPA is aimed at the prevention of unlawful activities associations in India.
    • Its main objective was to make powers available for dealing with activities directed against the integrity and sovereignty of India.

    (2) Sedition Law

    • Section 124A IPC deals with attempts to bring into hatred or contempt or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India.
    • This law was enacted by the British colonial government in 1870 with the sole object of suppressing all voices of Indians critical of the government.

     (3) NCRB Reports

    • In 2019, when the National Crime Records Bureau released the annual Crime in India report for year 2017, it included for the first time a new chapter on “Crime Committed by Anti National Elements.”
    • The chapter listed – “North East insurgents, Left Wing Extremists and Terrorists (including Jihadi terrorists)” as the three anti-national elements.

    Attempts for defining

    • There are criminal legislations and various judicial pronouncements deal with unlawful and subversive activities which are detrimental to the unity and integrity of the country.
    • In this regard, it is relevant to mention that the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976 inserted in the Constitution Article 31D (during Emergency) which defined “anti-national activity”.
    • This Article 31D was, later, omitted by the 43rd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1977.

    Supreme Court guidelines

    • In the ultimate analysis, the judgment in Kedar Nath (1962) read down Section 124A and held that without incitement to violence or rebellion there is no sedition.
    • It says that ‘only when the words written or spoken etc. which have the pernicious tendency or intention of creating public disorder the law steps in.

    Who maintains the data of such individuals?

    • The onus of maintenance of such data lies with the respective states.
    • ‘Public Order’ and ‘Police’ are State subjects as per the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.
    • Hence the data about the number of people arrested for indulging in anti-national activities are not maintained centrally.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Election Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2021

    The Election Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2021 that seeks to link electoral rolls to the Aadhaar number has been listed for introduction in the Lok Sabha.

    Key Provisions of the Election Laws (Amendment) Bill 2021

    (1) Aadhaar authentication:

    • The Bill seeks to empower electoral officers to seek Aadhaar number of people, who want to register as voters, for establishing their identity.
    • It also seeks to allow the electoral registration officers to ask for Aadhaar numbers from persons already included in the electoral roll for the purposes of authentication of entries in the electoral roll.
    • This would also aim to identify registration of the name of the same person in the electoral roll of more than one constituency or more than once in the same constituency.

    (2) Aadhaar linking with Voter ID

    • Linking Aadhaar with voter ID will be voluntary.
    • The amendment makes it clear that no application shall be denied and no entries in the electoral roll shall be deleted for the inability to produce Aadhaar number.
    • Such people will be allowed to furnish other documents as may be prescribed.

    (3) Amendments to the RP Act for new voter registration

    • Section 23 of the RP Act, 1950 will be amended to allow linking of electoral roll data with the Aadhaar ecosystem to curb the menace of multiple enrolments.
    • Amendment to section 14 of the RP Act, 1950 will allow having four qualifying dates for eligible people to register as voters, instead of one that is January 1 at present.
    • As of now, people who turn 18 on or before January 1 can register as voters but those turning 18 after January 1 wait for the whole year to get registered.
    • The Bill proposes to make the 1st day of January, 1st day of April, 1st day of July, and 1st day of October as the qualifying dates.

    (4) Imbibing gender neutrality

    • An amendment to section 20 of the RP Act, 1950 and section 60 of the RP Act, 1951 seeks to make the elections gender-neutral for service voters.
    • The amendment will also replace the word ‘wife’ with ‘spouse’ to make the statutes gender-neutral.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Election Commission

    The “informal interaction” of the CEC and two other Election Commissioners with the Prime Minister’s Principal Secretary has raised questions about the neutrality of the Commission, especially when elections to crucial States are around the corner.

    About Election Commission of India

    • The ECI is a constitutional authority whose responsibilities and powers are prescribed in the Constitution of India under Article 324.
    • In the performance of its functions, the Election Commission is insulated from executive interference.
    • It is the Commission that decides the election schedules for the conduct of elections, whether general elections or by-elections.
    • ECI decides on the location of polling stations, assignment of voters to the polling stations, location of counting centers, arrangements to be made in and around polling stations and counting centres and all allied matters.

    Litigations against EC

    • The decisions of the Commission can be challenged in the High Court and the Supreme Court of India by appropriate petitions.
    • By long-standing convention and several judicial pronouncements, once the actual process of elections has started, the judiciary does not intervene in the actual conduct of the polls.

    Issues with PMO meeting

    • Executive interference: ECs are expected to maintain distance from the executive — a constitutional safeguard to insulate the commission from external pressure and allow it to continue as an independent authority.
    • Violating official channels: The EC’s communication with the Government on election matters is through the bureaucracy — either with its administrative ministry — the Law Ministry or the Home Ministry.
    • Breach of protocol: The Law Ministry spells the fine print on law for the country and is expected not to breach the constitutional safeguard provided to the commission to ensure its autonomy.

    Recent incidence of criticisms

    Ans. Partiality in Elections

    • Over the last couple of years, several actions and omissions of the commission have come in for criticism.
    • Nearly 66 former bureaucrats in a letter addressed to the President, expressed their concern over the working of the Election Commission.
    • They felt was suffering from a credibility crisis, citing various violations of the model code of conduct during the 2019 Lok Sabha Elections.

    Importance of ECI for India

    • Conduction of Election: The ECI has been successfully conducting national as well as state elections since 1952.
    • Electoral participation: In recent years, however, the Commission has started to play a more active role to ensure greater participation of people.
    • Discipline of political parties: It had gone to the extent of disciplining the political parties with a threat of derecognizing if the parties failed in maintaining inner-party democracy.
    • Upholds federalism: It upholds the values enshrined in the Constitution viz, equality,
      equity, impartiality, independence; and rule of law in superintendence, direction, and control over electoral governance.
    • Free and fair elections: It conducts elections with the highest standard of credibility, freeness, fairness, transparency, integrity, accountability, autonomy and professionalism.

    Issues with ECI

    • Flaws in the composition: The Constitution doesn’t prescribe qualifications for members of the EC. They are not debarred from future appointments after retiring or resigning.
    • No security of tenure: Election commissioners aren’t constitutionally protected with security of tenure.
    • Partisan role: The EC has come under the scanner like never before, with increasing incidents of breach of the Model Code of Conduct in the 2019 general elections.
    • Political favor: The opposition alleged that the ECI was favoring the ruling party by giving clean chit to the model code of conduct violations made by the PM.
    • Non-competence: Increased violence and electoral malpractices under influence of money have resulted in political criminalization, which ECI is unable to arrest.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Issues with summoning CEC, EC to PMO

    Context

    The Chief Election Commissioner and two Election Commissioners were summoned by the PMO to attend a meeting with the Principal Secretary to the PM.

    Why the meeting raises questions?

    • The PMO summoning or “inviting” not just the CEC but the full bench is in violation of the Constitution, irrespective of how important or urgent the issue.
    • Violation of the principle of distancing from executive: When a person is appointed as CEC or EC, that person has to resign from his executive post in order to adhere to important constitutional principle of distancing from the executive/government.
    • The executive could appoint a person to these posts but could not order them, or remove me because of the constitutional scheme of things.
    • Violation of independence: An independent ECI is a gift of the Constitution to the nation. Free and fair and credible elections are sine qua non of the EC.
    • The Supreme Court has repeatedly stressed this point, calling it part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
    • Violation of warrant of precedence: The CEC is very high in the warrant of precedence — ninth, while the PS to PM is 23rd.
    • How can such a high constitutional functionary be summoned to attend a meeting with an officer, howsoever high and mighty?
    • It raises suspicions:  A meeting of the PS to the PM, formal or informal, online or in the PMO or ECI, just before elections raises unnecessary suspicions.

    Conclusion

    This incident is a transgression that should not happen again. The distance of an arm’s length in interactions between institutions envisaged in the Constitution is sacrosanct. It should not only be maintained but also “seen” to be maintained.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Back in news: Right to be Forgotten

    The Centre has informed the Delhi High Court that the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019 contains provisions related to the ‘right to be forgotten’.

    Right to be Forgotten

    • ‘Right to be forgotten’ is a fairly new concept in India where an individual could seek to remove or delete online posts which may contain an embarrassing picture, video or news articles mentioning them.
    • It comes under the right to privacy which has been held to be a fundamental right by the Supreme Court under Article 21.
    • In 2017, the Right to Privacy was declared a fundamental right by the Supreme Court in its landmark verdict.

    Why in news?

    • The Personal Data Protection Bill 2019 contains provisions related to the doctrine of ‘right to be forgotten’.
    • It highlighted two judgments passed by the Orissa High Court and the Karnataka High Court where they have accepted the doctrine of the ‘right to be forgotten’ as an essential part of the ‘right to privacy’.

    Mention in PDP Bill

    • The PDP bill aims to set out provisions meant for the protection of the personal data of individuals.
    • Clause 20 under Chapter V of this bill titled “Rights of Data Principal” mentions the “Right to be Forgotten.”
    • It states that the “data principal (the person to whom the data is related) shall have the right to restrict or prevent the continuing disclosure of his personal data by a data fiduciary”.
    • A data fiduciary means any person, including the State, a company, any juristic entity, or any individual who alone or in conjunction with others determines the purpose and means of the processing of personal data.

    Implications

    • Under the Right to be forgotten, users can de-link, limit, delete or correct the disclosure of their personal information held by data fiduciaries.

    Other similar provisions

    • Section 69A of the IT Act does provide for removal of “certain unlawful information” from an intermediary platform.
    • It primarily applies to ‘national security and public order related issues’ only.

    Also read:

    Draft Personal Data Protection Bill, 2021

     

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

     

     

  • Conflation between duties and rights

    Context

    There has been growing advocacy for the integration of duty with rights. On Constitution Day last month, many Union Ministers used the occasion to underline this proposal.

    What do rights come with duty mean?

    • It is a basic proposition that all rights come with duties.
    • But those duties are quite distinct from the meaning ascribed to them in the popular discourse.
    • When a person holds a right, she is owed an obligation by a duty-bearer.
    • For example, when citizens are promised a right against discrimination, the government is obliged to ensure that it treats everybody with equal care and concern.
    • Similarly, the guarantee of a right to freedom of speech enjoins the state to refrain from interfering with that liberty.

    Integrating rights with duties

    • Proponents of integration of duty with rights aim to treat otherwise non-binding obligations — the “fundamental duties” as Article 51A describes them on a par with, if not superior to, the various fundamental rights that the Constitution guarantees.
    • In an inversion of the well-known dictum, they see duties, and not rights, as trumps.
    • On Constitution Day last month, many Union Ministers used the occasion to underline this proposal.
    • The government puts forward an idea that our rights ought to be made conditional on the performance of a set of extraneous obligations.

    Issues with the proposal

    • This suggestion is plainly in the teeth of the Constitution’s text, language, and history.
    • To the framers of the Constitution, the very idea of deliberating over whether these rights ought to be provisional, and on whether these rights ought to be made subject to the performance of some alien duty, was against the republic’s vision.
    • Imposing duties a legislative prerogative: The Constitution’s framers saw the placing of mandates on individual responsibilities as nothing more than a legislative prerogative.
    • For example, the legislature could impose a duty on individuals to pay a tax on their income, and this duty could be enforced in a variety of ways.
    • If the tax imposed and the sanctions prescribed were reasonable, the obligations placed on the citizen will be constitutionally valid.
    • In this manner, Parliament and the State legislatures have imposed a plethora of duties — duties to care for the elderly and for children; duties to pay tolls and levies; duties against causing harm to others; duties to treat the environment with care, the list is endless.
    • Against Constitution: What is critical, though, is that these laws cannot make a person’s fundamental right contingent on the performance of a duty that they impose.
    • A legislation that does so will violate the Constitution.

    Background

    • The fundamental duties that are now contained in Article 51A were introduced through the 42nd constitutional amendment.
    • The Swaran Singh Committee, which was set up during the Emergency, and which recommended the insertion of the clause, also suggested that a failure to comply with a duty ought to result in punishment.
    • Ultimately, the amendment was introduced after the binding nature of the clause was removed.
    • In its finally adopted form, Article 51A encouraged citizens to perform several duties.

    Way forward

    • Know the precise nature of duties the rights create: The philosopher Onora O’Neill has argued with some force that we would do well to discuss the precise nature of duties that rights create.
    • Unless we do so, our charters of human rights may not by themselves be enough.
    • For example, we may want to ask ourselves if the promise of a right to free expression imposes on the state something more than a duty to forebear from making an unwarranted restriction on that liberty.
    •  Does it require the state to also work towards creating an equal society where each person finds herself in a position to express herself freely?

    Consider the question “How fundamental duties are related to the fundamental rights in the context of the Indian Constitution? What are the issues with making the enforcement of rights contingent on adhering to the duties?”

    Conclusion

    When we speak about the importance of obligations, it is these questions that must animate our discussions. Should we instead allow the language of fundamental duties to subsume our political debates, we would only be placing in jeopardy the moral principles at the heart of India’s republic.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • A case for in inclusion of Ladakh under Sixth Schedule

    A ruling party MP from Ladakh has demanded that the region be included in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution to safeguard land, employment, and cultural identity of the local population.

    What is the Sixth Schedule?

    • The Sixth Schedule under Article 244 provides for the formation of autonomous administrative divisions — Autonomous District Councils (ADCs).
    • ADCs have some legislative, judicial, and administrative autonomy within a state.
    • The Sixth Schedule applies to the NE states of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram (three Councils each), and Tripura (one Council).

    Composition of ADCs

    • ADCs have up to 30 members with a term of five years.
    • It can make laws, rules and regulations with regard to land, forest, water, agriculture, village councils, health, sanitation, village- and town-level policing, inheritance, marriage and divorce, social customs and mining, etc.
    • The Bodoland Territorial Council in Assam is an exception with more than 40 members and the right to make laws on 39 issues.

    Why does Ladakh want to be part of the Sixth Schedule?

    • Local aspirations: There was much enthusiasm initially, mostly in Leh, after the repeal of Art. 370 which created two new UTs.
    • Negligence in erstwhile J&K state: Buddhist-dominated Leh district had long demanded UT status because it felt neglected by the erstwhile state government.
    • Denial of Legislature: The enthusiasm waned as it was understood that while the UT of J&K would have a legislature, the UT of Ladakh would not.
    • Inadequate representation: The administration of the region is now completely in the hands of bureaucrats with only 1 MP.
    • New domicile criteria: The changed domicile policy in Jammu and Kashmir has raised fears in the region about its own land, employment, demography, and cultural identity.
    • Statehood demands: A coalition of social, religious, and political representatives in Leh and Kargil has demanded full statehood for Ladakh.

    Cultural significance of Ladakh

    • Ladakh is historically perceived as a cosmopolitan region with centuries of multiple cultural settings.
    • It was an Asian pivot – the people here traversed diverse cultural boundaries and engaged with ideas.

    Can Ladakh be included in Sixth Schedule?

    • NCST Recommends: In September 2019, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes recommended the inclusion of Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule.
    • Distinct culture: It was predominantly tribal (more than 97%), people from other parts of the country had been restricted from purchasing or acquiring land there, and its distinct cultural heritage needed preservation.

    Legal hurdles

    • Fifth schedule as an alternative: The Constitution is very clear, Sixth Schedule is for the Northeast. For tribal areas in the rest of the country, there is the Fifth Schedule.
    • Exclusive provision for NE: Notably, no region outside the Northeast has been included in the Sixth Schedule.
    • Requires Constitutional Amendment: It remains the prerogative of the government. For this, a constitutional amendment is required.

    Government’s response in this regard

    • The Centre woke up to the anxieties of the region when, a year after the abrogation of Article 370, when all political parties announced a boycott of the LAHDC-Leh elections.
    • The political factions in Ladakh were promised “Sixth Schedule-like” protections by the Home Minister.
    • The MHA has in Jan announced that a committee under then MoS Home G Kishan Reddy would be formed to address the issues related to language of Ladakh, culture of Ladakh and conservation of land in Ladakh.
    • It had assured representatives of Kargil and Leh that the government was committed to look into their concerns.

    Try this question from CSP 2015:

    Q.The provisions in Fifth Schedule and Sixth Schedule in the Constitution of India are made in order to-

    (a) protect the interests of Scheduled Tribes

    (b) determine the boundaries between States

    (c) determine the powers, authority and responsibilities of Panchayats

    (d) protect the interests of all the border States

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”0xt8a7bveb” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Inter-State Boundary Disputes in India

    The Union Home Ministry (MHA) has informed that 11 States and one Union Territory have boundary disputes between them.

    Why in news?

    • There are disputes arising out of the demarcation of boundaries and claims and counterclaims over territories.
    • Occasional protests and incidents of violence are reported from some of the disputed border areas.

    Major boundary disputes include:

    [1] Karnataka-Maharashtra

    • The Belgaum district is arguably part of one of the biggest inter-state border disputes in India.
    • The district has a large Marathi and Kannada-speaking populations and has been at the centre of a dispute for a long time.
    • The area came under Karnataka in 1956 when states were reorganized and till then it was under the Bombay presidency.

    [2] Assam-Mizoram

    • The border dispute between Assam and Mizoram is a legacy of two British-era notifications of 1875 and 1933, when Mizoram was called Lushai Hills, a district in Assam.
    • The 1875 notification differentiated Lushai Hills from the plains of Cachar and the other demarcated boundary between Lushai Hills and Manipur.
    • While Mizoram became a state only in 1987 following years of insurgency, it still insists on the boundary decided in 1875.
    • Assam, on the other hand, wants the boundary demarcated in 1986 (based on the 1933 notification).
    • In that case, entire Mizoram was part of Assam before the Independence,” Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said on July 27.
    • Mizoram says the 1986 agreement is not acceptable as the Mizo civil society was not consulted at that time.

    [3] Haryana-Himachal Pradesh

    • The Parwanoo region has had the spotlight over the border dispute between the two states.
    • It is next to the Panchkula district of Haryana and the state has claimed parts of the land in Himachal Pradesh as its own.

    [4] Himachal Pradesh-Ladakh

    • Himachal and Ladakh lay claim to Sarchu, an area on the route between Leh and Manali.
    • It is considered a major point where travellers stop when travelling between the two cities.
    • Sarchu is in between Himachal’s Lahul and Spiti district and Leh district in Ladakh.

    [5] Arunachal Pradesh-Assam

    • Arunachal’s grievance is that the re-organisation of North Eastern states unilaterally transferred several forested tracts in the plains that had traditionally belonged to hill tribal chiefs and communities to Assam.
    • After Arunachal Pradesh achieved statehood in 1987, a tripartite committee was appointed which recommended that certain territories be transferred from Assam to Arunachal.
    • Assam contested this and the matter is before the Supreme Court.

    [6] Meghalaya-Assam

    • The problem between Assam and Meghalaya started when the latter challenged the Assam Reorganisation Act of 1971, which gave Blocks I and II of the Mikir Hills or present-day Karbi Anglong district to Assam.
    • Meghalaya contends that both these blocks formed part of the erstwhile United Khasi and Jaintia Hills district when it was notified in 1835.
    • Meghalaya bases its case on survey maps of 1872 and 1929 and certain notifications of 1878 and 1951, while Assam wants to go by the rejected recommendations of the Churachand Committee.

    [7] Assam-Nagaland

    • The longest-running border dispute in the North East is between Assam and Nagaland, which began soon after Nagaland became a state in 1963.
    • The Nagaland State Act of 1962 had defined the state’s borders according to a 1925 notification when Naga Hills and Tuensang Area (NHTA) were integrated into a new administrative unit.
    • Nagaland, however, does not accept the boundary delineation and has demanded that the new state should also have all Naga-dominated areas in North Cachar and Nagaon districts.
    • Since Nagaland did not accept its notified borders, tensions between Assam and Nagaland flared up soon after the latter was formed, resulting in the first border clashes in 1965.
    • This was followed by major clashes between the two states along the border in 1968, 1979, 1985, 2007, 2014 and 2021.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Judges cannot be shielded from citizens’ questions

    Context

    Recently, the Chief Justice of India, in his own mild way, protested against the attack on judges. One can understand his pain and agony, but he too knows that judges do not, and should not live in ivory towers.

    Questioning and analysing actions of the judiciary

    • As the judiciary is one of the pillars of democracy, and the Constitution entrusts judges with the task of protecting the constitutional rights of the people, especially the right to life and liberty, the consumer of justice has every right, and would be fully justified in critically examining, and commenting upon each and every word of the judges spoken or written, howsoever unpalatable it may be.
    • It appears that it is in the above spirit that MP Shashi Tharoor, speaking in Parliament on the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Bill said that the judiciary had failed to stem the tide of militant majoritarianism.
    • He alleged that the “judiciary’s inaction almost always favours those in power”. 
    • He has raised pertinent questions, and has brought out the glaring failings of the judiciary in matters concerning the protection of the constitutional rights of citizens. 
    • Pendency of important cases such as the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution, the Citizenship Amendment Act, electoral bonds, and many petitions under the preventive detention laws highlights this issue.

    Issues in functioning of collegium system

    • As regards the functioning of the collegium system, judges are transferred without any seeming justification, and in some cases re-transferred, justifying neither their initial transfer nor the re-transfer.
    • Some elevations of judges raise eyebrows, while some are ignored.
    • Should the collegium not be more transparent than it has been in the past in the matter of the elevation and transfers of judges?

    Conclusion

    Judges cannot be shielded from citizens’ questions. After all, as a consumer of justice, the citizen has a right to know.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)